- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,201
- 52,659
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Okay, thanks.P.S.: peer review is not a proper name. No need to capitalise it. (Zircon isn't, either.)
Okay, thanks.
Kinda a related question: Should you capitalize [our] 'sun'?
Not if you're talking about our sun. If you're talking about A sun, then you don't need to.
I presume.
--- huh?
Okay --- thanks!Sorreh.
I believe the reason the word sun only ever gets capitalised is when we're referring to our nearest star. If referring to a (different) sun, it's usually left uncapitalised.
If no one is inerrant, then no one can inerrantly interpret scripture. You might be right about some interpretations, but you will be wrong about others. It doesn't matter which, since no one can tell the difference anyway. As far as the quotes from scripture, I didn't see how they even implied that scripture itself was inerrant.
What difference does it make? no one can tell which parts are true anyway so it's all suspect.Even though everyone seems to have different answers, does that mean it's impossible for any people to be given THE truth?
Visiting the theology forums is an interesting place. But when a person cannot tell the difference between versions of truth, that does not necessarily imply all of the interpretations are false. The scripture would have to read something like:
"But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you who are also incapable of teaching the truth too..."
But to make the claim it does as a condition that exists within Christianity itself, is a proof that the word of God is being truthful. To be sure about the state of Christianity, it is clearly evident that people do not see, "till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ" (Eph 4:13)
And the people certainly don't see this:
"No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more." (Jer 31:34)
Also all people have religious viewpoints which share some common ground based on morality and ethics which include Atheists. And all including Atheists are arguing about having primacy. To whom has been given guidance by that intial cause which created the universe? That is a matter of faith in something greater than the self. Even though everyone seems to have different answers, does that mean it's impossible for any people to be given THE truth?
"Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, And as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; And when we see Him, There is no beauty that we should desire Him. He is despised and rejected by men, A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him." (Is 53)
What difference does it make? no one can tell which parts are true anyway so it's all suspect.
When it comes to a belief it's all down to the believer anyway, we all believe the parts that we want to believe, that's why there are so many sects cults and break aways all doing their own thing, each one of them having their own truths and each one thinking all the others are wrong.
God isn't telling us anything?However, God isn't telling us anything, it is your fallible and unreasonable interpretation of scripture that tells us it isn't.
Fair enough -- I'll take his point with a flake of snow then.God isn't telling us anything?
Did Jesus walk on water?
Is Israel the Promised Land?No.
No.
No.
Do you have another question?
God isn't telling us anything?
Did Jesus walk on water?
Is Israel the Promised Land?
I"ve brought this thread back because i am seeing a lot of posts telling us it doesn't matter what we observe about the physical world around us, if God tells us it is not, then it is not. For example, scientists may tell us something is a duck because it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and feels like a duck, but if God tells us it isn't a duck, then it isn't. However, God isn't telling us anything, it is your fallible and unreasonable interpretation of scripture that tells us it isn't.
I wasn't aware you were confining this to 'observations about the physical world'.Do either of these questions relate to observations about the physical world?
That is the nature of science - it confines itself to questions of reality that can objectively be observed. It is your prerogative if you want to believe in the existence of a god, and that is outside the realm of scientific inquiry. However, in reference to belief in god influencing your beliefs, or the actions, of physical phenomena, then this falls within the realm of science.I wasn't aware you were confining this to 'observations about the physical world'.
It's certainly your prerogative to do so, but I find it interesting you would harp on we interpreting Scripture in light of the physical world, and leave other issues out of it.
In short, I get the feeling you want to keep it confined to one subject, so you can keep your rhetoric going about our 'fallible and unreasonable interpretation of scripture.'
If you think we're 'fallible and unreasonable', let's see you handle the Promised Land question w/o being hoist by your own petard.
The mirror hurts, doesn't it?
Re-read the post of mine you just quoted. That was the specific reason I brought this thread back. However, the thread applies to general concerns as well. None of you speak for God. About anything.I wasn't aware you were confining this to 'observations about the physical world'.
Why? I am talking about science, not theology. You can have whatever theology you like, I really don't care. It's when you stick your theological nose into science that I object.It's certainly your prerogative to do so, but I find it interesting you would harp on we interpreting Scripture in light of the physical world, and leave other issues out of it.
Yes, I like to keep things focused on one subject, if at all possible. Strange, huh?In short, I get the feeling you want to keep it confined to one subject, so you can keep your rhetoric going about our 'fallible and unreasonable interpretation of scripture.'
I really have little interest in whether or not Israel is the "promised land," however way you wish to interpret that title.If you think we're 'fallible and unreasonable', let's see you handle the Promised Land question w/o being hoist by your own petard.
What mirror? You keep repeating this line when it doesn't seem to fit.The mirror hurts, doesn't it?
God isn't telling us anything?
Did Jesus walk on water?
Is Israel the Promised Land?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?